Regina v May [1999] NSWCCA 40

Regina v May [1999] NSWCCA 40

The sentencing judge was entitled to regard this case as exceptional, justifying a sentence by way of periodic detention rather than full-time custody, given the respondent’s youth, remorse, plea of guilty, lack of aggravating features, prospects of rehabilitation, and that no specific sentencing error was identified.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 March 1999
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Determination
Outcome
Crown appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'sexual Assault' 'appeals Against Sentence']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'sexual Assault' 'appeals Against Sentence']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence imposed for sexual intercourse without consent was manifestly inadequate' 'Whether the judge erred by imposing a non-custodial sentence (periodic detention)']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge was entitled to regard this case as exceptional, justifying a sentence by way of periodic detention rather than full-time custody, given the respondent’s youth, remorse, plea of guilty, lack of aggravating features, prospects of rehabilitation, and that no specific sentencing error was identified.

Court Disposition

Crown appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.']